DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims and Other Notes
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6–9, 11–13, 15, and 17–20 are pending.
Claims 2, 5, 10, 14, and 16 are canceled.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The paragraph numbers cited in this Office Action in reference to the instant application are referring to the paragraph numbering of the PG-Pub of the instant application. See US 2023/0378531 A1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6–9, 11–13, 15, and 17–20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng et al. (US 2019/0190059 A1, hereinafter Feng) in view of Park et al. (US 2019/0341601 A1, hereinafter Park).
Regarding claim 1, Feng discloses a negative electrode for all-solid-state batteries, the negative electrode comprising:
a negative electrode current collector (see copper foil, [0024]) and
a coating layer disposed on a surface of the negative electrode current collector (see slurry, [0024]),
wherein the coating layer comprises polymer (B) (see polyvinylidene fluoride, [0024]) and a metal (see silicon, [0024]), and
wherein the polymer (B) is one or more selected from the group consisting of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF),polyethylene chlorotrifluoroethylene (ECTFE), polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE), polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene (PVdF-co-HFP), polybutyl methacrylate (PBMA), polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), and styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) (see polyvinylidene fluoride, [0024]), and
wherein the weight ratio of the metal to the polymer (B) is 0.25 or more and less than 4 (see mass ratio, [0024]).
Feng discloses a coating layer including 5 part of silicon (i.e., the metal) and 5 parts of PVDF (i.e., polymer B), which corresponds to a weight ratio of the metal to the polymer (B) of 1 (i.e., 5/5).
Feng does not explicitly disclose a negative electrode:
wherein the coating layer has a thickness of 100 nm to 10 μm.
Park discloses a negative electrode (50) for all-solid-state batteries, the negative electrode comprising a negative electrode current collector (51, [0082]) and a coating layer (55) disposed on a surface of the negative electrode current collector (51, [0082]), wherein the coating layer (55) has a thickness of 100 nm to 10 μm (see thickness, [0095]) to balance the lithium dendrite inhibition with lithium ion transport (see thickness, [0094]). Feng and Park are analogous because they are directed to lithium batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the coating layer of Feng with a thickness as taught by Park in order to balance the lithium dendrite inhibition with lithium ion transport.
Regarding claim 6, modified Feng discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein the polymer (B) comprises a functional group comprising oxygen or nitrogen (see PEO, [0024]).
If PEO is included in the polymer (B), the coating layer includes 5 part of silicon (i.e., the metal), 12 parts of PEO (i.e., polymer B), and 5 parts of PVDF (i.e., polymer B); and the weight ratio of the metal to the polymer (B) is 0.29 (i.e., 5/17).
Regarding claim 7, modified Feng discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein the metal is lithiophilic (see silicon, [0024]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Feng discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein the coating layer further comprises a solid electrolyte (see LiTFSI, [0024]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Feng discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein the coating layer comprises a lithiophilic material (see silicon, [0024]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Feng discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein the lithiophilic material comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of a lithiophilic metal, a salt of the lithiophilic metal, an oxide of the lithiophilic metal, and a hydrate of the lithiophilic metal (see silicon, [0024]).
Regarding claim 9, modified Feng discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein a weight ratio of the polymer (B) to the lithiophilic material is 30:70 to 90:10 (see mass ratio, [0024]).
Feng discloses a coating layer including 5 part of PVDF (i.e., polymer B) and 5 part of silicon (i.e., the lithiophilic material), which corresponds to a weight ratio of the polymer (B) to the lithiophilic material of 50:50 (i.e., 5/5).
Regarding claims 11–13, 15, and 17–20, Feng discloses a battery comprising a negative electrode (FIG. 4, [0022]), wherein the negative electrode comprises:
a negative electrode current collector (see copper foil, [0024]) and
a coating layer disposed on a surface of the negative electrode current collector (see slurry, [0024]),
wherein the coating layer comprises polymer (B) (see polyvinylidene fluoride, [0024]) and a metal (see silicon, [0024]), and
wherein the polymer (B) is one or more selected from the group consisting of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF),polyethylene chlorotrifluoroethylene (ECTFE), polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE), polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene (PVdF-co-HFP), polybutyl methacrylate (PBMA), polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), and styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) (see polyvinylidene fluoride, [0024]), and
wherein the weight ratio of the metal to the polymer (B) is 0.25 or more and less than 4 (see mass ratio, [0024]).
wherein the polymer (B) comprises a functional group comprising oxygen or nitrogen (see PEO, [0024]);
wherein the metal is lithiophilic (see silicon, [0024]);
wherein the coating layer further comprises a solid electrolyte (see LiTFSI, [0024]);
wherein the coating layer comprises a lithiophilic material (see silicon, [0024]);
wherein the lithiophilic material comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of a lithiophilic metal, a salt of the lithiophilic metal, an oxide of the lithiophilic metal, and a hydrate of the lithiophilic metal (see silicon, [0024]); and
wherein a weight ratio of the polymer (B) to the lithiophilic material is 30:70 to 90:10 (see mass ratio, [0024]).
Feng discloses a coating layer including 5 part of silicon (i.e., the metal) and 5 parts of PVDF (i.e., polymer B), which corresponds to a weight ratio of the metal to the polymer (B) of 1 (i.e., 5/5), and Feng discloses a coating layer including 5 part of PVDF (i.e., polymer B) and 5 part of silicon (i.e., the lithiophilic material), which corresponds to a weight ratio of the polymer (B) to the lithiophilic material of 50:50 (i.e., 1/1). If PEO is included in the polymer (B), the coating layer includes 5 part of silicon (i.e., the metal), 12 parts of PEO (i.e., polymer B), and 5 parts of PVDF (i.e., polymer B); and the weight ratio of the metal to the polymer (B) is 0.29 (i.e., 5/17).
Feng does not explicitly disclose:
an all-solid-state battery comprising lithium deposited between the coating layer and the negative electrode current collector after initial charging and discharging of the all-solid-state battery,
wherein the coating layer is disposed so as to face a solid electrolyte layer.
Park discloses an all-solid-state battery (FIG. 4, [0082]) comprising lithium (23) deposited between a coating layer (55) and a negative electrode current collector (51) after initial charging and discharging of the all-solid-state battery (FIG. 4, [0083]), wherein the coating layer (55) is disposed so as to face a solid electrolyte layer (60, [0104]) to inhibit lithium dendrite formation (see lithium dendrite, [0093]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery of Feng to be an all-solid-state battery as taught by Park in order to inhibit lithium dendrite formation.
Claims 3, 4, 7, 9, 11–13, 15, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ku et al. (US 2021/0242490 A1, hereinafter Ku).
Regarding claim 1, Ku discloses a negative electrode (20) for all-solid-state batteries (1, [0139]), the negative electrode (20) comprising:
a negative electrode current collector (21, [0139]) and
a coating layer (22) disposed on a surface of the negative electrode current collector (21, [0139]),
wherein the coating layer (22) comprises polymer (B) (see polyvinylidene fluoride, [0204]) and a metal (see silver, [0204]), and
wherein the polymer (B) is one or more selected from the group consisting of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF),polyethylene chlorotrifluoroethylene (ECTFE), polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE), polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene (PVdF-co-HFP), polybutyl methacrylate (PBMA), polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), and styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) (see polyvinylidene fluoride, [0204]), and
wherein the weight ratio of the metal to the polymer (B) is 0.25 or more and less than 4 (see weight ratio, [0204]).
Fu discloses a coating layer including 93 wt% of silver and carbon black in a weight ratio of 25:75 and 7 wt% of PVDF, which corresponds to a weight ratio of the metal to the polymer (B) of 3 (i.e., 23.25/7).
Fu does not explicitly disclose a thickness of the coating layer described above is between 100 nm and 10 μm.
However, Fu discloses the coating layer preferably has a thickness of 3 μm to 7 μm to suppress collapse to lithium dendrites and improve the energy density (see thickness, [0131]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the coating layer of Fu with a thickness of 100 nm to 10 μm in order to suppress collapse to lithium dendrites and improve the energy density.
Regarding claim 6, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein the polymer (B) comprises a functional group comprising oxygen or nitrogen (see binder, [0129]).
Regarding claim 7, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein the metal is lithiophilic (see silver, [0204]).
Regarding claim 8, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein the coating layer further comprises a solid electrolyte (see ion conductive agent, [0136]).
Regarding claim 3, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein the coating layer comprises a lithiophilic material (see silver, [0204]).
Regarding claim 4, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein the lithiophilic material comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of a lithiophilic metal, a salt of the lithiophilic metal, an oxide of the lithiophilic metal, and a hydrate of the lithiophilic metal (see silver, [0204]).
Regarding claim 9, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses a negative electrode:
wherein a weight ratio of the polymer (B) to the lithiophilic material is 30:70 to 90:10 (see weight ratio, [0204]).
Fu discloses a coating layer including 93 wt% of silver and carbon black in a weight ratio of 25:75 and 7 wt% of PVDF, which corresponds to a weight ratio of the polymer (B) to the lithiophilic material of 75:25 (i.e., 23.25/7).
Regarding claim 11, Ku discloses an all-solid-state battery (1) comprising a negative electrode (20, [0139]), wherein the negative electrode comprises:
a negative electrode current collector (21, [0139]) and
a coating layer (22) disposed on a surface of the negative electrode current collector (21, [0139]),
wherein the coating layer (22) comprises polymer (B) (see polyvinylidene fluoride, [0204]) and a metal (see silver, [0204]), and
wherein the polymer (B) is one or more selected from the group consisting of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF),polyethylene chlorotrifluoroethylene (ECTFE), polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE), polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene (PVdF-co-HFP), polybutyl methacrylate (PBMA), polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP), carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), and styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) (see polyvinylidene fluoride, [0204]), and
wherein the weight ratio of the metal to the polymer (B) is 0.25 or more and less than 4 (see weight ratio, [0204]).
Fu discloses a coating layer including 93 wt% of silver and carbon black in a weight ratio of 25:75 and 7 wt% of PVDF, which corresponds to a weight ratio of the metal to the polymer (B) of 3 (i.e., 23.25/7).
Fu does not explicitly disclose a thickness of the coating layer described above is between 100 nm and 10 μm.
However, Fu discloses the coating layer preferably has a thickness of 3 μm to 7 μm to suppress collapse to lithium dendrites and improve the energy density (see thickness, [0131]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the coating layer of Fu with a thickness of 100 nm to 10 μm in order to suppress collapse to lithium dendrites and improve the energy density
Regarding claim 12, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an all-solid-state battery:
wherein lithium (23) deposited between the coating layer (22) and the negative electrode current collector (21) after initial charging and discharging of the all-solid-state battery (1, [0139])
Regarding claim 13, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an all-solid-state battery:
wherein the coating layer (22) is disposed so as to face a solid electrolyte layer (30, [0139]).
Regarding claim 17, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an all-solid-state battery:
wherein the polymer (B) comprises a functional group comprising oxygen or nitrogen (see binder, [0129]).
Regarding claim 18, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an all-solid-state battery:
wherein the metal is lithiophilic (see silver, [0204]).
Regarding claim 19, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an all-solid-state battery:
wherein the coating layer further comprises a solid electrolyte (see ion conductive agent, [0136]).
Regarding claim 15, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an all-solid-state battery:
wherein the lithiophilic material comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of a lithiophilic metal, a salt of the lithiophilic metal, an oxide of the lithiophilic metal, and a hydrate of the lithiophilic metal (see silver, [0204]).
Regarding claim 20, Ku discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an all-solid-state battery:
wherein a weight ratio of the polymer (B) to the lithiophilic material is 30:70 to 90:10 (see weight ratio, [0204]).
Fu discloses a coating layer including 93 wt% of silver and carbon black in a weight ratio of 25:75 and 7 wt% of PVDF, which corresponds to a weight ratio of the polymer (B) to the lithiophilic material of 75:25 (i.e., 23.25/7).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue the combination Feng and Park is improper because it fails to account for the fundamental structural and functional differences (P7/¶3). Feng discloses a coating layer adjacent to a current collector (FIG. 4, [0024]) and lithium dendrites are an issue encountered during cycling of lithium batteries (see lithium dendrites, [0004]). Park also discloses a coating layer (55) adjacent to a current collector (51, [0083]) and lithium dendrites are an issue encountered during cycling of lithium batteries (see lithium dendrite, [0093]). Park further discloses the thickness of the coating layer adjacent to the current collector is important to suppressing lithium dendrites (see thickness, [0094]). Although the composition of the coating layers are not identical, one skilled in the art would have an expectation of success that a thickness of a coating layer adjacent to a current collector would be applicable to a coating layer that is also adjacent to a current collector. Therefore, the combination Feng and Park is proper because it balances the structural and functional differences with the structural and functional similarities.
Applicants argue the protective layer of Park is structurally and functionally different from the bulk active material layer of Feng (P7/¶5). Feng discloses a coating layer adjacent to a current collector (FIG. 4, [0024]); and Park also discloses a coating layer (55) adjacent to a current collector (51, [0083]). Both Feng (see lithium dendrites, [0004]) and Park (see lithium dendrite, [0093]) are concerned with lithium dendrites. Although the composition of the coating layers are not identical, one skilled in the art would have an expectation of success that a thickness of a coating layer adjacent to a current collector would be applicable to a coating layer that is also adjacent to a current collector. Therefore, the protective layer of Park has some structural and functional similarities with the bulk active material layer of Feng.
Applicants argue reducing the thickness to 100 nm to 10 μm would leave insufficient active material for the battery to function as intended (P7/¶4). It is noted that "the arguments of counsel cannot take the place of evidence in the record", In re Schulze, 346 F.2d 600, 602, 145 USPQ 716, 718 (CCPA 1965). It is the examiner’s position that the arguments provided by the applicant regarding reducing the thickness to 100 nm to 10 μm would leave insufficient active material for the battery to function as intended must be supported by a declaration or affidavit. As set forth in MPEP 716.02(g), "the reason for requiring evidence in a declaration or affidavit form is to obtain the assurances that any statements or representations made are correct, as provided by 35 U.S.C. 24 and 18 U.S.C. 1001." Further, Ku discloses a thickness of 100 nm to 10 μm provides sufficient active material for a battery to function (see thickness, [0131]). Therefore, applicants have not demonstrated reducing the thickness to 100 nm to 10 μm would leave insufficient active material for the battery to function as intended.
Applicants argue there is no rationale as to why a person of ordinary skill would modify a bulk active material layer to have the thickness of a thin protective layer when doing so would render the active material layer inoperable for its intended purpose (P8/¶1). It is noted that "the arguments of counsel cannot take the place of evidence in the record", In re Schulze, 346 F.2d 600, 602, 145 USPQ 716, 718 (CCPA 1965). It is the examiner’s position that the arguments provided by the applicant regarding reducing the thickness to 100 nm to 10 μm would leave insufficient active material for the battery to function as intended must be supported by a declaration or affidavit. As set forth in MPEP 716.02(g), "the reason for requiring evidence in a declaration or affidavit form is to obtain the assurances that any statements or representations made are correct, as provided by 35 U.S.C. 24 and 18 U.S.C. 1001." Ku discloses a thickness of 100 nm to 10 μm provides sufficient active material for a battery to function (see thickness, [0131]). Park discloses a coating layer (55) adjacent to a current collector (51, [0083]) and lithium dendrites are an issue encountered during cycling of lithium batteries (see lithium dendrite, [0093]). Park further discloses the thickness of the coating layer adjacent to the current collector is important to suppressing lithium dendrites (see thickness, [0094]). Therefore, there is a rationale as to why a person of ordinary skill would modify a bulk active material layer to have the thickness of a thin protective layer when doing so would not render the active material layer inoperable for its intended purpose.
Applicants argue Feng and Park remain silent with respect to technical significance of the claimed thickness range (P8/¶2). Park discloses the thickness of the coating layer adjacent to the current collector is important to suppressing lithium dendrites (see thickness, [0094]). Therefore, Park is not silent with respect to technical significance of the claimed thickness range.
Applicants argue there is no reasonable expectation of success that the thickness parameters of Park would be effective when applied to a coating layer comprising polymer (B) and a metal with a weight ratio of 0.25 or more and less than 4 (P8/¶5). Feng discloses a coating layer adjacent to a current collector (FIG. 4, [0024]) and lithium dendrites are an issue encountered during cycling of lithium batteries (see lithium dendrites, [0004]). Park also discloses a coating layer (55) adjacent to a current collector (51, [0083]) and lithium dendrites are an issue encountered during cycling of lithium batteries (see lithium dendrite, [0093]). Park further discloses the thickness of the coating layer adjacent to the current collector is important to suppressing lithium dendrites (see thickness, [0094]). Although the composition of the coating layers are not identical, one skilled in the art would have an expectation of success that a thickness of a coating layer adjacent to a current collector would be applicable to a coating layer that is also adjacent to a current collector. Therefore, there is a reasonable expectation of success that the thickness parameters of Park would be effective when applied to a coating layer comprising polymer (B) and a metal with a weight ratio of 0.25 or more and less than 4.
Applicants argue the thickness parameters of Park developed for a lithium or lithium alloy protective layer would be suitable when applied to a coating layer comprising polymer (B) and a metal with a weight ratio of 0.25 or more and less than 4 (P9/¶1). Feng discloses a coating layer adjacent to a current collector (FIG. 4, [0024]) and lithium dendrites are an issue encountered during cycling of lithium batteries (see lithium dendrites, [0004]). Park also discloses a coating layer (55) adjacent to a current collector (51, [0083]) and lithium dendrites are an issue encountered during cycling of lithium batteries (see lithium dendrite, [0093]). Park further discloses the thickness of the coating layer adjacent to the current collector is important to suppressing lithium dendrites (see thickness, [0094]). Park discloses the coating layer may include a lithium ion conductive polymer and solid electrolytes (see protective layer, [0093]); and Feng also discloses the coating layer may include a lithium ion conductive polymer and solid electrolytes (see negative electrode sheet, [0024]). Therefore, the thickness parameters of Park developed for a lithium or lithium alloy protective layer would be suitable when applied to a coating layer comprising polymer (B) and a metal with a weight ratio of 0.25 or more and less than 4.
Applicants argue the cited references do not teach or suggest the combination of (i) polymer (B) selected from the recited group, (ii) a metal at the claimed weight ratio, and (iii) a coating layer thickness of 100 nm to 10 μm achieve the synergistic technical effect of balancing ionic conductivity preservation with lithium dendrite suppression (P9/¶1). The fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sean P Cullen, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-1251. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 6:00 am to 4:00 pm CT, Friday 6:00 am to 12:00 pm CT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Basia A Ridley can be reached at (571)272-1453. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Sean P Cullen, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights